Dataset Information

Comparability of Event Adjudication Versus Administrative Billing Claims for Outcome Ascertainment in the DAPT Study: Findings From the EXTEND-DAPT Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Data from administrative claims may provide an efficient alternative for end point ascertainment in clinical trials. However, it is uncertain how well claims data compare to adjudication by a clinical events committee in trials of patients with cardiovascular disease.

Methods

We matched 1336 patients ≥65 years old who received percutaneous coronary intervention in the DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) Study with the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry linked to Medicare claims as part of the EXTEND (Extending Trial-Based Evaluations of Medical Therapies Using Novel Sources of Data) Study. Adjudicated trial end points were compared with Medicare claims data with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes from inpatient hospitalizations using time-to-event analyses, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and kappa statistics.

Results

At 21-month follow-up, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (combined mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke) was similar between trial-adjudicated events and claims data (7.9% versus 7.2%, respectively; P=0.50). Bleeding rates were lower using adjudicated events compared with claims (5.0% versus 8.6%, respectively; P<0.001). The sensitivity and positive predictive value of comprehensive billing codes for identifying adjudicated events were 65.6% and 85.7% for myocardial infarction, 61.5% and 47.1% for stroke, and 76.8% and 39.3% for bleeding, respectively. Specificity and negative predictive value for all outcomes ranged from 93.7% to 99.5%. All 39 adjudicated deaths were identified using Medicare data. Kappa statistics assessing agreement between events for myocardial infarction, stroke, and bleeding were 0.73, 0.52, and 0.49, respectively.

Conclusions

Claims data had moderate agreement with adjudication for myocardial infarction and poor agreement but high specificity for bleeding and stroke in the DAPT Study. Deaths were identified equivalently. Using claims data in clinical trials could be an efficient way to assess mortality among Medicare patients and may help detect other outcomes, although additional monitoring is likely needed to ensure accurate assessment of events.

SUBMITTER: Faridi KF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7855905 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Cerebrovascular events (CVEs) are devastating complications after aortic valve replacement. We assessed whether billing claims accurately identify CVEs in place of clinical event adjudication in structural heart disease trials. METHODS:Adult participants in the US CoreValve High Risk and SURTAVI trials (Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients) were linked to Medicare inpatient claims from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2016. Claims consistent with CVEs within 14 days of a similar trial-adjudicated CVE were considered a match. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, Clinical Modification billing codes for cerebrovascular disease were determined against trial-defined CVEs as the criterion standard. Kaplan-Meier estimates of claims-defined versus trial-defined CVEs were compared. RESULTS:Among 4230 linked trial participants (linkage rate 79.8%), 550 (13.0%) sustained 630 adjudicated CVEs over a 5-year follow-up period. Linked and nonlinked individuals were similar. An algorithm using 4 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes (434.91, 434.11, 433.11, and 997.02) had a sensitivity of 60.9%, specificity of 99.0%, positive predictive value of 86.5%, and negative predictive value of 95.8% for identifying a trial-adjudicated ischemic stroke. An algorithm using 3 International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes (I63.9, I63.40, I63.49) had a sensitivity of 66.7%, specificity of 99.4%, positive predictive value of 88.9%, and negative predictive value of 97.6%. CONCLUSIONS:In linked clinical trial and Medicare claims data, 4 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification and 3 International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification billing codes identified half of trial-adjudicated CVEs during follow-up with high specificity and predictive value, but imperfect sensitivity. Although low sensitivity may limit the use of claims to substitute for traditional trial outcomes to identify CVEs, high specificity suggests claims could be used to trigger evaluation of neurological events, potentially improving the efficiency of the evaluation of techniques and devices designed to reduce such events.

Project description:BackgroundWhether passively collected data can substitute for adjudicated outcomes to reproduce the magnitude and direction of treatment effect observed in cardiovascular clinical trials is not well known.MethodsWe linked adults ≥65 years of age in the HiR (US CoreValve Pivotal High Risk) and SURTAVI trials (Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients) to 100% Medicare inpatient claims, January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016. Primary (eg, death and stroke) and secondary trial end points were compared across treatment arms (eg, transcatheter aortic valve replacement [TAVR] versus surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR]) using trial-adjudicated outcomes versus outcomes derived from claims at 1 year (HiR) or 2 years (SURTAVI).ResultsAmong 600 linked HiR participants (linkage rate, 80.0%), the rate of the trial's primary end point of all-cause mortality occurred in 13.7% of patients receiving TAVR and 16.4% of patients receiving SAVR at 1 year by using both trial data (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.65-1.09]; P=0.33) and claims data (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.66-1.11]; P=0.34; interaction P value=0.80). Noninferiority of TAVR relative to SAVR was seen by using both trial- and claims-based outcomes (Pnoninferiority<0.001 for both). Among 1005 linked SURTAVI trial participants (linkage rate, 60.5%), the trial's primary end point was 12.9% for TAVR and 13.1% for SAVR using trial data (hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.79-1.48]; P=0.90), and 11.3% for TAVR and 12.5% for SAVR patients using claims data (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.73-1.41]; P=0.58; interaction P value=0.89). TAVR was noninferior to SAVR when compared using both trial and claims (Pnoninferiority<0.001 for both). Rates of procedural secondary outcomes (eg, aortic valve reintervention, pacemaker rates) were more closely concordant between trial and claims data than nonprocedural outcomes (eg, stroke, bleeding, cardiogenic shock).ConclusionsIn the HiR and SURTAVI trials, ascertainment of trial primary end points using claims reproduced both the magnitude and direction of treatment effect in comparison with adjudicated event data, but nonfatal and nonprocedural secondary outcomes were not as well reproduced. Use of claims to substitute for adjudicated outcomes in traditional trial treatment comparisons may be valid and feasible for all-cause mortality and certain procedural outcomes but may be less suitable for other end points.

Project description:ImportanceBecause hearing loss is highly prevalent and treatable, determining its association with morbidity has major public health implications for disease prevention and the maintenance of health in adults with hearing loss.ObjectiveTo investigate the association between the diagnosis of incident hearing loss and medical comorbidities in adults 50 years or older.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective, propensity-matched cohort study using administrative claims data from commercially insured and Medicare Advantage members in a geographically diverse US health plan. Adults 50 years or older with claims for services rendered from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016, were observed for 2 (n = 154 414), 5 (n = 44 852), and 10 (n = 4728) years. This research was conceptualized and data were analyzed between September 2016 and November 2017.ExposuresA claim for incident hearing loss is defined as 2 claims for hearing loss within 2 consecutive years without evidence of hearing device use, excluding claims for sudden hearing loss or hearing loss secondary to medical conditions.Main outcomes and measuresIncident claims for dementia, depression, accidental falls, nonvertebral fractures, acute myocardial infarction, and stroke.ResultsAfter cohort matching, 48% of participants were women (n = 74 464), 61% were white (n = 93 442), and 31% (n = 48 056) were Medicare Advantage insured, with a mean (SD) age of 64 (10) years. In a multivariate-adjusted modified Poisson regression with robust standard errors, relative associations were strongest for dementia (relative risk at 5 years, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.38-1.64) and depression (relative risk at 5 years, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.26-1.58). The absolute risk of all outcomes was greater in persons with hearing loss than in those without hearing loss at all times, with the greatest risk difference observed at 10 years for all outcomes. The 10-year risk attributable to hearing loss was 3.20 per 100 persons (95% CI, 1.76-4.63) for dementia, 3.57 per 100 persons (95% CI, 1.67-5.47) for falls, and 6.88 per 100 persons (95% CI, 4.62-9.14) for depression.Conclusions and relevanceIn this large observational study using administrative claims data, incident untreated hearing loss was associated with greater incident morbidity than no hearing loss across a range of health conditions. Future studies are needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying these associations and to determine if treatment for hearing loss could reduce the risk of comorbidity.

Project description:While medical records have detailed information, they are limited in reach to the availability and accessibility of those records. On the other hand, administrative data while limited in scope, have a much further reach in coverage of an entire population. However, few studies have validated the use of administrative data for identifying infections in pediatric populations. Pediatric patients from Ontario, Canada aged <18 years were randomly sampled from the Electronic Medical Record Administrative data Linked Database (EMRALD). Using physician diagnoses from the electronic medical record (EMR) as the reference standard, we determined the criterion validity of physician billing claims in administrative data for identifying infectious disease syndromes from 2012 to 2014. Diagnosis codes were assessed by infection category (respiratory, skin and soft tissue, gastrointestinal, urinary tract and otitis externa) and for all infections combined. Sensitivity analyses assessed the performance if patients had more than one reason to visit the physician. We analysed 2,139 patients and found 33.3% of all visits were for an infection, and respiratory infections accounted for 67.6% of the infections. When we combined all infection categories, sensitivity was 0.74 (95% CI 0.70-0.77), specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.96), positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.90), and negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.88 (95% CI 0.86-0.89). For respiratory infections, sensitivity was 0.77 (95% CI 0.73-0.81), specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97), PPV was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88), and NPV was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.95). Similar performance was observed for skin and soft tissue, gastrointestinal, urinary tract, and otitis externa infections, but with lower sensitivity. Performance measures were highest when the patient visited the physician with only one health complaint. We found when using linked EMR data as the reference standard, administrative billing codes are reasonably accurate in identifying infections in a pediatric population.

Project description:Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains one of the most common indications for pediatric hospitalization in the United States, and it is frequently the focus of research and quality studies. Use of administrative data is increasingly common for these purposes, although proper validation is required to ensure valid study conclusions.To validate administrative billing data for hospitalizations owing to childhood CAP.Case-control study of 4 tertiary care, freestanding children’s hospitals in the United States.A total of 998 medical records of a 25% random sample of 3646 children discharged in 2010 with at least 1 International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code representing possible pneumonia were reviewed. Discharges (matched on date of admission) without a pneumonia-related discharge code were also examined to identify potential missed pneumonia cases. Two reference standards, based on provider diagnosis alone (provider confirmed) or in combination with consistent clinical and radiographic evidence of pneumonia (definite), were used to identify CAP.Twelve ICD-9-CM–based coding strategies, each using a combination of primary or secondary codes representing pneumonia or pneumonia-related complications. Six algorithms excluded children with complex chronic conditions.Sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values (NPV and PPV, respectively) of the 12 identification strategies.For provider-confirmed CAP (n?=?680), sensitivity ranged from 60.7% to 99.7%; specificity, 75.7% to 96.4%; PPV, 67.9% to 89.6%; and NPV, 82.6% to 99.8%. For definite CAP (n?=?547), sensitivity ranged from 65.6% to 99.6%; specificity, 68.7% to 93.0%; PPV, 54.6% to 77.9%; and NPV, 87.8% to 99.8%. Unrestricted use of the pneumonia-related codes was inaccurate, although several strategies improved specificity to more than 90% with a variable effect on sensitivity. Excluding children with complex chronic conditions demonstrated the most favorable performance characteristics. Performance of the algorithms was similar across institutions.Administrative data are valuable for studying pediatric CAP hospitalizations. The strategies presented here will aid in the accurate identification of relevant and comparable patient populations for research and performance improvement studies.